Ulf Hahnel

Dr. Ulf Hahnel

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

16Years (2011-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
30 December 2021 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SMStephanie Mertens
Stephanie Mertens
MHMario Herberz
Mario Herberz
UHUlf Hahnel
Ulf Hahnel
TBTobias Brosch
Tobias Brosch
Over the past decade, choice architecture interventions or so-called nudges have received widespread attention from both researchers and policy makers. Built on insights from the behavioral sciences, this class of behavioral interventions focuses on the design of choice environments that facilitate personally and socially desirable decisions without restricting people in their freedom of choice. Drawing on more than 200 studies reporting over 450 effect sizes (n = 2,149,683), we present a comprehensive analysis of the effectiveness of choice architecture interventions across techniques, behavioral domains, and contextual study characteristics. Our results show that choice architecture interventions overall promote behavior change with a small to medium effect size of Cohen’s d = 0.45 (95% CI [0.39, 0.52]). In addition, we find that the effectiveness of choice architecture interventions varies significantly as a function of technique and domain. Across behavioral domains, interventions that target the organization and structure of choice alternatives (decision structure) consistently outperform interventions that focus on the description of alternatives (decision information) or the reinforcement of behavioral intentions (decision assistance). Food choices are particularly responsive to choice architecture interventions, with effect sizes up to 2.5 times larger than those in other behavioral domains. Overall, choice architecture interventions affect behavior relatively independently of contextual study characteristics such as the geographical location or the target population of the intervention. Our analysis further reveals a moderate publication bias toward positive results in the literature. We end with a discussion of the implications of our findings for theory and behaviorally informed policy making. Significance Changing individuals’ behavior is key to tackling some of today’s most pressing societal challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic or climate change. Choice architecture interventions aim to nudge people toward personally and socially desirable behavior through the design of choice environments. Although increasingly popular, little is known about the overall effectiveness of choice architecture interventions and the conditions under which they facilitate behavior change. Here we quantitatively review over a decade of research, showing that choice architecture interventions successfully promote behavior change across key behavioral domains, populations, and locations. Our findings offer insights into the effects of choice architecture and provide guidelines for behaviorally informed policy making.

9 February 2024 in Science Advances
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MVMadalina Vlasceanu
Madalina Vlasceanu
KDKimberly C. Doell
Kimberly C. Doell
JBJoseph B. Bak-Coleman
Joseph B. Bak-Coleman
BTBoryana Todorova
Boryana Todorova
MBMichael M. Berkebile-Weinberg
Michael M. Berkebile-Weinberg
JBJay J. Van Bavel
Jay J. Van Bavel
Effectively reducing climate change requires marked, global behavior change. However, it is unclear which strategies are most likely to motivate people to change their climate beliefs and behaviors. Here, we tested 11 expert-crowdsourced interventions on four climate mitigation outcomes: beliefs, policy support, information sharing intention, and an effortful tree-planting behavioral task. Across 59,440 participants from 63 countries, the interventions’ effectiveness was small, largely limited to nonclimate skeptics, and differed across outcomes: Beliefs were strengthened mostly by decreasing psychological distance (by 2.3%), policy support by writing a letter to a future-generation member (2.6%), information sharing by negative emotion induction (12.1%), and no intervention increased the more effortful behavior—several interventions even reduced tree planting. Last, the effects of each intervention differed depending on people’s initial climate beliefs. These findings suggest that the impact of behavioral climate interventions varies across audiences and target behaviors.

1 March 2015 in Renewable Energy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LKLiridon Korcaj
Liridon Korcaj
UHUlf Hahnel
Ulf Hahnel
HSHans Spada
Hans Spada

1 February 2020 in Energy Policy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
UHUlf Hahnel
Ulf Hahnel
MHMario Herberz
Mario Herberz
ABAlejandro Pena Bello
Alejandro Pena Bello
David ParraDavid Parra
David Parra
TBTobias Brosch
Tobias Brosch

15 March 2024 in Nature Climate Change
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
KNKristian Nielsen
Kristian Nielsen
VCViktoria Cologna
Viktoria Cologna
JBJan Michael Bauer
Jan Michael Bauer
SBSebastian Berger
Sebastian Berger
CBCameron Brick
Cameron Brick
KWKimberly S. Wolske
Kimberly S. Wolske

13 December 2021 in Nature Energy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ABAlejandro Pena Bello
Alejandro Pena Bello
David ParraDavid Parra
David Parra
MHMario Herberz
Mario Herberz
VTVerena Tiefenbeck
Verena Tiefenbeck
MPMartin K. Patel
Martin K. Patel
UHUlf Hahnel
Ulf Hahnel